2011 spec chassis and tires - official?!

[bil588]

So new engines, but spec chassis and tires?

5-23-2008

http://www.indycar.com/news/story.php?story_id=11488

[johntt]

Thats not a confirmation, Barnhardt just said that spec tyres and chassis would be the best way to control cost, competition, etc. in his opinion.

Others like Tony George and the teams may have a different perspective.

[broadrun96]

That link looks more like a few ideas to be batted around to draw in some competition. Not sure who other than HPD and maybe Toyota would be interested. Now if they went SMALL and turbo I could see GM coming back, maybe 2-3L V6 turbos, just please no corn-based ethanol.
I'm personally a big fan of multiple engines of balanced configurations in the field, single makes just aren't that interesting. Esp important engine choices if they go spec chassis and tires.

[Amar7605]

Why would GM come back because of turbos?

[Alwaysfirst]

Ethanol is here to stay and GM have already said that they may be interested in making a return now that the two series have rejoined if the conditions are right.

[broadrun96]

If they go small engines, the 2.0 4 cyl Ecotec is a GREAT marketing tool that they have been pushing like mad in almost any car they can cram it in and similar tech could be used to build a V6 in desired. And they are big fans of pushing their fuel friendly cars and like Audi they know how to market.

[mountainstar]

I just hit the snooze button again. A spec chassis for a developmental series, well maybe, but for what is supposed to the greatest racing spectacle in all of motorsport how boring. Just how stale and bland do people want to make it?

[Amar7605]

On the other hand, let's hope that IRL doesn't do what NASCAR has done with their Car Of Tomorrow. Sure, they have 4 different manufactuers, but it's basically a spec car. And lately their races have been rather boring.

[bil588]

But the IRL's plan for growth isn't just to mimic NASCAR. Angstadt says he focuses on five brand attributes to pitch: speed, technology, innovation, diversity and green.

- Terry Angstadt, president of the IRL's commercial division

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/motor...1c-cover_N.htm

Chevrolet to return?

(read last two paragraphs)

http://www.racecar-engineering.com/c...-cadillac.html

http://www.prattmiller.com/

http://www.chevrolet.com/chevyracing/alms/

(note: since Racecar Engineering article, Remington has announced sponsorship of Cadillac in the 2008 SWC plus a merger has taken place in open wheel)

http://www.world-challenge.com/news/story.php?ID=833

[drdisque]

The guy who is leading the "Industry Forum" to discuss the new specs is a former Ford guy.

I think that's an indication of who is interested.

Spec tires is a no brainer. Tire wars are bad for the sport from a cost perspective and completely unsustainable. Every major racing series in the world now uses a spec tire.

I think the spec chassis is largely a function of nobody else being interested in building a second chassis without the revenue guaranteed by being a spec chassis.

[cptkablamo]

If they are that worried about costs, why don't they talk to the Grand Am guys - their chassis are not quite spec but have a lot of control parts while leaving some of the most visibly different parts to the manufacturers discretion...

[drdisque]

Sports Cars are a lot less aero-sensitive than IndyCars and since many of their teams have "gentleman drivers" they'll stick with the chassis they have even if they're not winning and even with that, by the end of the last chassis cycle virtually every Prototype on the grid was a Riley or Crawford.

[Teretonga]

Spec chassis:
Chassis cost an awful lot of money these days.
Teams are not interested in building their own because of the huge development costs and if there is a chassis or aero battle the costs are out of all proportion. If you get it wrong the first time it costs a fortune to fix it and you are last....until you fix it ...if you can.
In a customer series even major companies are reluctant to put up the developments costs without a guaranteed market. It just costs a lot.

European F3 is a good example. Dallara Mercedes is by far the most common chassis engine combination. When Volkswagen won a few races earlier M. Benz was not impressed and threatened to leave if a development war started.
Before Mercedes entered F3 Honda dominated. So everyone had Honda's and it was hard to break in with something else. When Mercedes started winning everyone went down that route.
Lola and Dome combined a few years ago to produce a new chassis which was good but not great. It never sold and the project died.

Reynard lost out in CART at the end of the 90's and they died.
In the IRL Panoz didn't keep with Dallara's pace of development and they disappeared...
Development like that costs $$$ and if it isn't in the customers budgets or they can't afford it the chassis manufacturers can't sustain it... and lose out.

It is just reality.
If engine manufacturers enter the IRL they will fight but if one engine is superior to all others then everyone will want one and few will take a chance on one that is not so good.

Look at Ganassi' Toyota deal in 2004-5. It handicapped the team for two or three years until they got a Honda deal. Sponsors do not want that sort of problem and will not come in to teams going through that sort of problem so the teams are happy to go with the flow and they all get competitive packages. They top teams like Penske & co are always looking for the "advantage" and will do anything to get it....
Look at Roger's history with the Illmor chevy deal, the Mercedes pushrod engine, etc.

All those initatives were expensive, raised the cost bar, and gave penske a engineering advantage other teams intially didn't have unless they copied them. And that is one of the justifications for the original Tony George vision for the breakaway anyway.

Honda has committed for five years already.... Lets just see where it leads.

[nickyf1]

I say give the teams the option to build their own car, or to buy a car from a manufacturer such as Panoz or Lola. If a team wishes to build their own car, it can only be changed every two or so years, thsi keeps the costs of making your own car down. The manufactuer built cars can be changed at the end of every year. This gives the smaller teams a chance to keep up with the bigger teams if they choose a manufactuer built chassis. Each team must use a manufactuerer built engine etc...

Thats my idea anyway.

[Teretonga]

Originally Posted by nickyf1

I say give the teams the option to build their own car, or to buy a car from a manufacturer such as Panoz or Lola. If a team wishes to build their own car, it can only be changed every two or so years, thsi keeps the costs of making your own car down. The manufactuer built cars can be changed at the end of every year. This gives the smaller teams a chance to keep up with the bigger teams if they choose a manufactuer built chassis. Each team must use a manufactuerer built engine etc...

Thats my idea anyway.

What yu would actually need to do Nicky is do what F3 does now. The design is homologated (fixed) for a three year period. All designs. Now changes until the next cycle. The present F3 cycle runs from 2008-2010, the last one 2005-2007, the one prior to that 2001-2004.

This would achieve the same result you are looking for.

[drdisque]

No teams have any interest in building their own chassis and doing so probably wouldn't be safe.

The IndyCar Series tends to use even LONGER chassis cycles. The current chassis cycle has lasted since 2003 and will go to 2010. The previous cycle went from '99 to '02 I believe.

[cptkablamo]

I still don't see what is wrong with a hugely controlled chassis with certain visual differences - don't forget that the guys who set the rules and then desgin the things probably know what they are talking about...then you have a couple engine manufacturers and performance levelling tactics and a long chassis life...

For the average joe the cars will look and sound different to each other, the costs are down and the thing is competitive...

[johntt]

http://www.gordonkirby.com/categorie..._is_no129.html
More info here. Another column due Thursday this week on the matter.

[bil588]

Originally Posted by drdisque

The guy who is leading the "Industry Forum" to discuss the new specs is a former Ford guy.

I think that's an indication of who is interested.

Spec tires is a no brainer. Tire wars are bad for the sport from a cost perspective and completely unsustainable. Every major racing series in the world now uses a spec tire.

I think the spec chassis is largely a function of nobody else being interested in building a second chassis without the revenue guaranteed by being a spec chassis.

But should a non-spec chassis be ruled out Three years beforehand?

Non-spec tires:

Moto GP
ALMS
LMS
FIA GT

[mountainstar]

I believe a fixed spec car has it's time and place.

In this case I think rather than going for the lowest common denominator and championing mediocrity, it's time to step it up a bit and be innovative. This is supposedly from those in Indiana, the greatest spectacle in racing, so let's see it!

I have confidence there are intelligent engineers out there that can devise an interesting 21st Century race series.

[climb]

Originally Posted by mountainstar

I just hit the snooze button again. A spec chassis for a developmental series, well maybe, but for what is supposed to the greatest racing spectacle in all of motorsport how boring. Just how stale and bland do people want to make it?

I am with Teretonga that bringing costs down is still (and still will be in the medium term) of paramount importance to keep the series healthy.

Apart what he rightly says about sponsors, it's crystal clear that the American Automobile industry is far from escaping the crisis, and the perspectives about oil prices certainly won't help.
In such a situation it's harder to predict a corporation like GM or Ford to bounce back bringing rivers of money in.

Therefore i entirely agree with Barnhart's line, tho we can agree as well that a multi chassis- multi engine series is more fascinating to the hardcore fans.
But before purchasing a thing you like, you must be sure you can afford it.

[Bob Riebe]

After this years snoozarama that comes with sameness, the boys at Indy had better figure out away to return to the speed differential of old that made the race exciting, not watching everyone drone around like a hive of formula vees on steroids.

I would much rather see some one win by three laps than three feet if the ability to make up the three feet is as remote as making up the three laps.

[bil588]

Marshall Pruett's thoughts on professional spec racing

http://auto-racing.speedtv.com/artic...of_status_quo/

[mountainstar]

Originally Posted by climb

I am with Teretonga that bringing costs down is still (and still will be in the medium term) of paramount importance to keep the series healthy.

Apart what he rightly says about sponsors, it's crystal clear that the American Automobile industry is far from escaping the crisis, and the perspectives about oil prices certainly won't help.
In such a situation it's harder to predict a corporation like GM or Ford to bounce back bringing rivers of money in.

Therefore i entirely agree with Barnhart's line, tho we can agree as well that a multi chassis- multi engine series is more fascinating to the hardcore fans.
But before purchasing a thing you like, you must be sure you can afford it.

One hand you have cost cuts and cost control. In the other hand, you kill your revenue by making it a snoozefest. If you want growth you need to expand rather than contract and be a bit more dynamic and forward thinking. Not have the same old tripe going around.

Do you think a spec class stops Penske and others from spending like crazy?

Yes a spec car can fill a purpose and plug a hole in the dike for a while. But it's not what you want to move forward.

[drdisque]

The "snoozefest" at indy was solely due to the high track temps and low grip that caused.

Yes, I think that having a spec chassis has caused a drop in spending by even the big teams.

Also, the new car will not be the "same old tripe". It will be innovative and new, just everyone will probably have largely the same one.

Some of you said the series needs more "speed differential". All you get from that is 3 cars on the lead lap at the end of the day and crazy dangerous closing rates.